2018 Audi Q2 v Volvo XC40

Two small, chic luxury crossovers out of Europe duke it out

Looking for a deal on this car?

From our vantage point, there’s barely a volume carmaker of note without a small crossover SUV – a high-riding hatchback with attitude designed for young up-and-comers and well-funded downsizers in equal measure.

Two of the most obvious and well-credentialled options are tested here, the familiar Audi Q2 – a more playful and chic alternative to the grown-up Q3 – and the relatively new-on-the-scene Volvo XC40, a veritable frisson on wheels for any fan of all things Swedish (aided by China).

This pair of upscale Euros fight against other contenders such as the Mercedes-Benz GLA, the BMW X2, Jaguar E-Pace and upcoming Lexus UX. At the same time, their price points around $60K once optioned up may cause the practically minded to return to their drawing boards.

We’ve chosen the Audi and the Volvo because they share some key traits: angular design language, premium positioning, and a focus on cabin materials and design nous. There seems to be a natural alignment. But which one would we want in our driveways?

Price and specs

The entry point to the Q2 or XC40 line-ups is $41,800 and $47,990 respectively, but the two variants we had on test were a little higher up the figurative food chain.

The German entrant is the Q2 2.0 TFSI quattro, with a list price of $48,500 before on-road costs. However, as is so often the case, the plethora of optional extras fitted – some essential, some just potential deal-sweeteners – took the RRP to $59,240. No small sum.

Hardly out of the ordinary, though, given our XC40 in T5 R-Design Launch Edition guise has an RRP of $56,740, with a couple of options padding the as-tested cost to $57,890. Eep!

As you’d expect given the price differentials before options, the Volvo offers more equipment as standard at this spec level.

Whereas the Audi has cruise control with speed limiter, the Volvo has active radar-guided speed-mirroring. The Audi has a reversing camera, the Volvo a 360-degree overhead view with rear cross-traffic alert. The Audi’s 7.0-inch screen is smaller than the Volvo’s 9.0-inch unit, and the Swede gets auto parking software, a Qi inductive phone charger, keyless entry/start… You get the drift.

Volvo’s AEB also recognises cyclists and big animals, and its lane-assist partial autonomy tech is standard. The short-lived days of the company charging extra for active safety are winding down.

Once the Audi Q2 is optioned up, though, the equipment differential dissipates. As it should!

‘Our’ Q2 also had sexy 19-inch alloy wheels with a five-arm rotor design and black/silver finish for $2100, the mystifyingly overpriced DAB+ digital radio for $550, and a pumped-up audio system for $500 to fight the XC40’s standard Harmon Kardon set-up.

At the end of the day, neither of these cars are particularly good value. But then, if money-for-metal was the priority, you’d be looking at a Mitsubishi, Nissan, Hyundai or even a Mazda. Right?

Audi Q2

Volvo XC40

Spec

2.0 TFSI quattro

T5 R-Design Launch Edition

Price

$48,500

$56,740

Airbags

6

7

AEB w/pedestrian detection

Yes

Yes

Cruise control

Regular

Adaptive, speed-mirroring

Reversing camera

Yes

360-degree overhead,

cross-traffic alert

Lane-keeping aids

Option

Yes

Blind-spot monitor

Yes

Yes

Auto parking

Option

Yes

Wheels

18-inch

20-inch

Headlights

LED

LED

Tailgate

Electric

Electric

Seats

Leather

Leather/suede, heated

Climate control

Yes

Yes

Screen

7.0-inch rotary dial control

9.0-inch touch control

Sat-nav

Yes

Yes

Apple CarPlay/Android Auto

Yes

Yes

Inductive phone charging

Option

Yes

Keyless entry/start

Option

Yes

Options fitted

Quantum Grey paint $800

Metallic pearl paint $1150

Titanium Black styling $900

Orange floor and door inserts NCO

Manhattan Grey finish $500

Assistance Package $990

Comfort Package $1900

Technik Package $2500

19-inch Audi Sport wheels $2100

DAB+ digital radio $550

180W sound system $500

Cabins

Fans of either brand will find few surprises in the respective cabin layouts. There’s a cost-driven design homogeneity in most cars today.

In fairness, Audi has made some effort to distinguish the Q2 from something a little more prosaic such as the A3, the most obvious elements being the deep-red plastic inserts on the doors, dash and transmission tunnel. There are various trim options, by the way.

In typical Teutonic fashion, everything is screwed together flawlessly, and every surface is pleasantly tactile. Quality pervades the second each door thunks closed. And man do they thunk. I’m a sucker for frameless rear-view mirrors too…

The familiar layout includes a floating slim tablet screen with menus navigated via a knurled metallic rotary dial, set among shortcut buttons taking you to the mapping, phone, media, radio or home menu pages.

The nods to its TT style leader come via the circular air vents, slick little steering wheel (with ample adjustment) and the Virtual Cockpit digital instrument display, which lets you view maps on a ginormous scale, or other types of driving data.

If you want more data, there’s the option of a dinky little flip-up glass screen onto which a head-up display projects, and an extra-cost Qi wireless smartphone charger in the console. Storage areas include decent bottle holders in the doors, a large felt-lined glovebox, a small centre console, a set of cupholders and small nook under the seat. On the topic of seats, they’re heated but have manual adjustment. Outrageous…

The back seats offer acceptable head room and leg room for two average-sized adults, though this is hardly the most capacious crossover, and the big C-pillars restrict outward vision. There are outboard ISOFIX anchors and top tethers, if you’re carrying young kids.

Above and in all sets: Q2 top, XC40 bottom

The back seats fold 60:40, but there are no amenities such as rear vents, USB points or a flip-down armrest. Just reading lights. And they’re not even crisp white LEDs…

The boot is a pretty pokey 355L, which is on a par with the average little hatchback, while under the loading floor there’s a space-saver spare wheel.

So what about the Volvo? This is a company that’s clearly determined to bolster its luxury credentials through interior design. The quality of build, surface textures and ergonomics are at Audi level, and the design is certainly fresher and more interesting.

Highlights include the portrait-style touchscreen with swiping and a stacked-tile submenu layout, though unlike the rotary-controlled Audi you’ll cover it with finger smudges in no time flat. And we don’t like operating AC controls this way, either… Not all buttons are evil.

There are tasteful hints of cold steel, checker-plate highlights, gorgeous leather/suede seats and a sense of tasteful minimalism – like the decor in holiday houses on a Swedish archipelago – though the optional orange carpet and door inlays are… Polarising.

The digital instruments aren’t as flash as Audi’s, but the key essentials – crisp instruments, a digital speed display, route guidance and trip info – are all there.

The Volvo is clearly the more practical of this pair, its tall roof giving more head room despite the standard panoramic glass roof robbing space, more leg room, rear air vents, LED lights and superior outward visibility. It also has two levels of boot storage (460L max) and flat-folding back seats.

Given the Volvo’s 11cm longer wheelbase, one should not be surprised that it’s the more practical contender here. Indeed, only the BMW X1 matches it in this class, and that car has nowhere near the flair.

Drivetrains

Both cars on test can rightly claim to offer hot-hatch levels of performance, at least in a straight line. The Audi Q2’s 2.0-litre turbocharged petrol engine makes 140kW of peak power between 4200 and 6000rpm, and 320Nm of torque over a wide part of the rev band, 1500 to 4200rpm. As that might suggest, it’s tractable, muscular just off idle, and almost always willing to respond to throttle inputs the millisecond you plant your foot.

Audi claims a 0–100km/h sprint time of 6.5 seconds, and combined-cycle fuel use of 6.5L/100km on a dyno, though we yielded 7.7L/100km. The gearbox is a seven-speed double-clutch auto with rapid-fire shifting on the move, plus the odd moment of hesitancy if you drive with a point-and-shoot style around town.

As the quattro nomenclature suggests, it sports variable all-wheel drive, offering ample traction on slippery surfaces, though it lacks the gearing and clearance for any serious off-roading. Stick to snow runs.

By contrast, the Volvo’s 2.0-litre turbo makes a meatier 185kW, and 350Nm of torque between 1800 and 4800rpm, though because its larger frame means it weighs 190kg more than the Audi, its 0–100km/h time is only one-tenth quicker at 6.4sec.

It’s a little thirstier too, with its claim being 7.7L/100km and our drive yielding 8.4L/100km.

It uses an eight-speed automatic gearbox that’s not quite as crisp on the move as the Audi’s, but smoother in the urban jungle, and the paddle-shifters are so tactile you’ll find any excuse to use them. The on-demand AWD system like the Q2’s is there to bolster on-road traction or gravel sure-footedness, nothing more.

Driving

Both of these little crossovers are simultaneously tasked with offering their occupants an ever-so-slightly elevated driving position – something the Volvo does slightly better – along with a sporty feel (Audi wins) tempered by urban comfort and plushness (XC40 does this better). Tough call.

The Audi sits lower, and really does feel like pedalling any other hatchback. The Virtual Cockpit is wonderfully informative, the electric steering well-weighted, the body control on song, directional changes very dynamically adept, and the ride suitably firm, albeit devolving into busyness over sharp hits thanks to its steel springs, fixed dampers and 19-inch wheels on low-profile rubber.

We also commend the effectiveness of the AEB in reverse, which saved us from embarrassingly clipping a recycling bin hidden in our blind spot when reverse parallel parking (by ‘us’, I mean ‘me’).

The Volvo by contrast sits a little higher, feels a smidgen less agile – though it’s far from being a roly-poly barge – and cossets occupants over humps and bumps a little better, rarely pushing its dampers to the limit of compression. It’s a little quieter over coarse-chip surfaces, too.

Additionally, there are various driving modes to cycle through, which is a good thing considering how numb and video-gamey the steering is until you dial in more resistance. Some have criticised the ride quality on its 20s, but I disagree. It’s comfortable indeed.

Fittingly, there’s every piece of active safety tech you can imagine fitted, though the lane-assist system is flaky at best and needs some fettling to better recognise road lines. The digital dash is also comparatively bereft of submenus, and a head-up display would be a nice accoutrement.

Running costs

Both brands offer service packages covering three years or 45,000km of travel (intervals are annual/15,000km, whichever comes first). It’s no coincidence that these cover the standard warranty and roadside periods.

Audi charges $1590 for its package of three visits, while Volvo has two packages called SmartCare ($2165) and SmartCare Plus (an eye-watering $2980, which gets you extras not usually included in service plans such as two sets of wiper blades, a new set of brake pads and a wheel alignment).

Volvo offers greater transparency, with a five-year/75,000km package there for $4030, equating to five visits at $806 a pop, or $6345 for SmartCare Plus. That most certainly isn’t cheap…

VERDICT

Both of these cars are fashion accessories wearing premium price tags, though each offers a heap of desirability. Just look at them…

The Audi gets a tick for its sportier driving feel, more reasonable running costs, more manageable opening price and that Virtual Cockpit. It’s easy to see why you might go for one over a Golf GTI, or downsize from a bigger SUV for something smaller and more chic.

But the Volvo has come out of nowhere to steal everyone else’s thunder. Just like the bigger XC60, the XC40 balances the company’s once-defining penchants for practically and safety, with polished driving manners and sublime design, albeit tempered by a high price to entry and those servicing costs.

Those weaknesses aside, the Volvo floated this writer’s boat more than the Audi, though I dare say your proclivities will guide you as much as our hot-take will.

Cabin Space & Comfort

Technology & Connectivity

Price & Features

Ride & Handling

In The News

Audi has revealed a long-wheelbase version of the Q2 compact crossover for the Chinese market, dubbed the Q2L.
Featuring a 38mm longer body than the standard model, the Q2L is 4229mm in length and offers a 2628mm wheelbase – 33mm longer than the regular Q2.
The extra space between the front and rear axles offers increased leg- and kneeroom for rear-seat passengers, something prioritised in China, hence the growing amount of market-specific long-wheelbase versions of global models.
…

Audi is just so little for so much money. And 6 airbags? Even a base model fiesta came with 7 as standard back in 2012. Volvo is just a better SUV all over.

Calvin2nd Jul 2018

Interesting price point for both cars. Makes me think that the price points for their regular hatches are a little steep - in particular when you compare the XC40 T5 to the V40 T4.

onetenth29th Jun 2018

Unbelievable Audi has got more packages than an AFL locker room.

Kahn_Tysh29th Jun 2018

The Volvo looks great by itself. But parked next to that mess of an Audi, it's stunning.

Rob5829th Jun 2018

Maybe I've been looking at a computer too long today, but the side & rear profile of the Volvo looks more Chinese than Swedish. Could it be that Geely have some input to the design?

Homer28th Jun 2018

Drove both of these as well as the XC60. Need/want a SUV for high mileage (40K+ km pa) work. Old and ugly enough to want an SUV for this purpose, my APR tuned S3 sedan is for other things. Here's the rub, on a whim went to the Kia place, drove current 2.0 litre diesel Sportage GT-Line (a new upgraded model with 8 speed box is due in a few weeks). Obvious running cost and warranty benefits. However, after the drive my mate (between us, 65 and 70 years old, foolishly have owned over 120 cars, boys and toys) both said "this is nicer that the others". Better ride, better seats, better steering, a touch of sports feel, all the gadgets (and more with new model) and bit under $50K on the road. The XC40 (R spec) was quoted at $69K otr. We were both stunned at how good this car was and it's a no brainer choice. I've owned all the big German brands and can rightly be accused of badge snobbery, but there is no justification for either of these or their Merc/BMW equivalents.

JoeR_AUS28th Jun 2018

Haha Yes I did the same thing but you must of got confused and skipped quality, finish and refinement for warranty and features

WileE29th Jun 2018

and it would lucky to be still going after 10 years

Sir Vinny the Brave6th Jul 2018

Yes the Germans are like old Tiger tanks

Troy128th Jun 2018

Volvo are on drugs with there servicing cost. All of there cars are way over the comparable Germans vehicles on service costs, yet they dont stack up on build quality or desirability, performance, resale, etc. Volvo are a bit of a no-where brand at the moment in Australia which is a shame.

Try Again29th Jun 2018

Build Quality - ever sat in a used BMW?

Cher23rd Jul 2018

yeah i have, whats the problem?

Sir Vinny the Brave6th Jul 2018

Why? They rubbish?

Try Again7th Jul 2018

They last 3 years max, i have never seen a used BMW > 3 years old age well. Basically your just driving a run down German Toyota Corolla. Unless you can upgrade them every 3 years forget about it. Especially in Australia where we pay through the nose for nothing.

Moog128th Jun 2018

hmm, interesting thoughts given their sales improvements of late

Cheng29th Jun 2018

Love both.

azukay28th Jun 2018

Is the orange that bright in the Volvo that you had to wear sunglasses in it :)

Jake Frederics28th Jun 2018

If I have to buy a small overpriced hatchback posong as a SUV it will be thw Volvo

Alex28th Jun 2018

Fanboy mode activated

VOLVOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Marky28th Jun 2018

Ordered my XC40 on the weekend. Was considering a VW Tiguan R-Line but thought I’d try the XC40. Amazing car. Would never in a million years considered a Volvo but the features, drive and looks blew me away. Yeah it’s on the pricey end but it’s in a different class compared to the Q2, which is just a small awkward looking crossover.

Fake Tan7th Jan 2019

have you had any reliability issues? im aware of previous volvo issues

mightor9628th Jun 2018

I am in the market for a SUV for the Mrs. Her Hyundai Veloster Turbo is out of warranty and as expected starting to cost me money. She is ready to go back to a SUV, after having a bad experience with her previous Audi Q5. We drove the R design XC40,what a nice car, expensive and not available until years end. I looked at the Alfa Stelvio, we were going to drive it Saturday, but we are put off by quality concerns, aka water leaking through hatch etc. I refuse to buy a BMW, Audi or MB again. The Epace is an over priced dud, the Lexus NX is fugly and the boss says the Hyundai Tuscan is boring. What to do? Is a 1 year old Macan for $80K a good idea or is this just a glorified Q5?

Cher23rd Jul 2018

your stubbornness may become an issue for you. in saying that, I dont think anything bm, audi or merc really stands out from the crowd at the moment anyway, but Jag, Volvo etc will ruin you come resale if they continue to charge such unrealistically high prices then slash them in a year or two. is the new santa fe too big?

Horatio29th Jun 2018

Get the XC40 Momentum, it’s a bit cheaper and will be worth the wait if you really like it better than the others. My 2c.

Try Again29th Jun 2018

Mate the Volvo’s build quality is not only on par with the best of the Germans, it is probably as good as Lexus. Trust me I have done the shake everything test. My advice, wait for the UX Lexus maybe if concerned. Agree with you on the overpriced MB, BMW rubbish. I wouldn’t give my money to the VW group - this isn’t Germany.

Frosty28th Jun 2018

Can’t compare Porsche to MB and Co build quality is next level up

mightor9628th Jun 2018

Having never owned a Porsche, I only have reviews and comments from owners to gauge reliability. I’m happy to step up in price from the Audi level, but if it’s another unreliable German, I will never go Euro again.

Cher23rd Jul 2018

one of the boys has had a few cayennes and theyve never had any issues

WileE29th Jun 2018

Porsche Macan reliability is top notch.JD Powers also ranks it highly.It Is in another league to a Q5

James H29th Jun 2018

JD Power ranks Kia higher than Porsche.

WileE29th Jun 2018

Porsche tied with Lexus for number one spot in US 2017 and that's saying something truthful.Kia well down the list.

2016: "Kia ranks highest in initial quality...the first time in 27 years that a non-premium brand has topped the rankings. It is also the second consecutive year that Kia, which ranked second in 2015, has led all non-premium makes in initial quality."

2017: "Kia ranks highest in overall initial quality for a second consecutive year"

2018: "Kia ranks second....and it is the fourth consecutive year that Kia is the highest-ranking Mass Market brand"

You can cherry pick all the surveys you like but at the end of the day if each of Porsche and Kia scores reasonably well by any criteria you have to ask yourself which one would you rather drive Kia or Porsche?Now be honest Jimmy especially if you have driven both.

Cheers!!!!

James H29th Jun 2018

“Cherry pick” lol. Is that your best argument when the facts I presented trumped your bias? Lame. You’ve been outplayed mate. Give up. Don’t resort to the old well “which one would you rather drive”, it makes you look even more ignorant.

Cheers!!

WileE29th Jun 2018

The truth obviously hurts .I like the truth.

Cheers!!!

mightor9629th Jun 2018

Mike drop!

onetenth29th Jun 2018

And that’s saying something considering Porsche sold 246,000 for 2017 and Kia sold 7,250,000 for 2017.

JoeR_AUS28th Jun 2018

Value

Why is it journalists are apologetic about the price of these cars and their value but when they test an Asian car for over 50k.... nothing

You do realise an Top of the range CX-5 Akera is 56k drive away

Mike Stevens28th Jun 2018

Funnily enough, we have an XC40 v CX-5 comparo on the way...

kejovi28th Jun 2018

I do like the Q2, that rear window in the XC40 is pretty severe......nothing like the wonderful big glasshouses of Volvos of old.

Ranil28th Jun 2018

Yeah, you can (almost) forgive it when all the other manufacturers are doing it... but Volvo with its safety credentials - a bit disappointing.

kejovi28th Jun 2018

If they could make things like the beautiful 700/850 wagons......and have them leaders in safety, I'd like to see bigger glasshouses now.

Chriz28th Jun 2018

Small SUV at 1710kg? A bit of a porker. No wonder why 185kW AWD only gets >6 sec 0-100.